Complete NCTE internship file built around one action research: diagnostic test, eight remedial lessons and a parallel post-test
Mapped to your syllabusNCTE / NCERT NCTE 2014 · School Internship records (NCTE framework) · Sem 3–4B.Ed Mathematics Internship File: Diagnostic and Remedial Teaching of Fraction Errors in Class 7 is a complete school-internship file for a mathematics pedagogy trainee, built around one action research. The setting is a fictional government composite school in Prayagraj district, Uttar Pradesh, where the trainee is allotted Class 7-A for the 16-week internship.
The core problem is familiar to anyone who has checked a Class 7 notebook: pupils write 2/3 + 1/4 = 3/7, believe 1/8 is bigger than 1/6 "because 8 is bigger", turn the wrong fraction upside down when dividing, and are sure that multiplying always makes a number larger. The trainee gives a 20-item diagnostic test that sorts these into five error types, teaches eight remedial lessons that move from fraction strips and paper folding to pictures and then symbols, and gives a parallel post-test. The results are analysed in Excel using error frequencies, mean gain and normalised gain.
Around that study sits the rest of the file the NCTE framework asks for: a lesson-plan format with one full Herbartian exemplar, a unit achievement test with blueprint and item analysis, a case study of one child, a case study of the school, a reflective diary format with sample entries, and five low-cost teaching aids. Every form is a blank, editable proforma. The bundle also carries a 13-slide presentation and a viva bank for the internship assessment.
For educational purposes only.
Syllabus alignment
During the first week of internship in Class 7-A, the trainee checked 30 notebooks for the exercise on fractions. More than half the pupils had added numerators and denominators separately, and many had inverted the first fraction while dividing. In oral questioning, pupils said 1/8 was greater than 1/6, and several could not place 3/4 on a number line between 0 and 1. The mentor teacher confirmed that the class had "finished" fractions in the previous term and that the same errors appeared in the half-yearly examination.
The problem is therefore not that the topic was never taught but that pupils hold reasoned, wrong rules carried over from whole numbers. This action research asks whether diagnosing these errors with a 20-item test and re-teaching through a concrete–pictorial–abstract sequence over eight remedial lessons can reduce the number of pupils showing each error type, as measured by a parallel post-test, and what the trainee learns about planning teaching from pupils' errors.
Fractions are the first place in school mathematics where whole-number habits start giving wrong answers, and errors formed in Classes 5 to 7 tend to stay until algebra. This action research was planned for one section of Class 7 (38 on roll) in a government composite school during the 16-week B.Ed internship. A 20-item diagnostic test identifies five error types in comparison, addition and subtraction, mixed numbers, multiplication and division of fractions. Eight remedial lessons follow a concrete–pictorial–abstract sequence using fraction strips, paper folding, a number-line "washing line" and error-spotting cards. A parallel post-test measures change. The study aims to improve the class's fraction work and to build the trainee's habit of teaching from evidence about pupils' thinking.
NCF 2005 and the National Curriculum Framework for School Education 2023 both ask teachers to treat pupils' mistakes as information rather than failure. Diagnostic testing followed by remedial teaching is listed among the required internship tasks in the NCTE school-internship framework, and it combines naturally with action research, which is a teacher's systematic study of a problem in their own classroom.
Most internship files treat lesson plans, tests and case studies as separate chores. Here they are linked: the diagnostic test feeds the action research, the child case study follows one pupil from the same class, the achievement test checks the unit after remediation, and the diary records what the trainee learned at each step.
All materials cost under ₹300 (chart paper, old cardboard, string, clothes pegs). The mentor teacher can allot eight periods plus four zero periods. Tests take 35 minutes each. Analysis needs only Excel or LibreOffice Calc.
In scope
Out of scope
Classroom action research with a diagnostic–remedial structure, framed in Corey's sense of teachers studying their own practice to improve it, and planned as a plan → act → observe → reflect cycle (Kemmis and McTaggart).
Class 7-A, 38 pupils on roll; analysis uses the 36 who sat both tests. Pupils are identified by roll number only.
| Weeks | Work |
|---|---|
| 1–2 | Observation, problem noticed, diagnostic test written and tried out |
| 3 | Pre-test, error coding, grouping by error type |
| 4–6 | Eight remedial lessons (two or three a week) |
| 7 | Post-test, analysis |
| 8 | Second loop for persisting errors; reflection |
| 9–12 | Unit achievement test, item analysis |
| 13–16 | Report writing, file compilation, presentation |
Per-error frequency before and after; class mean and percentage; mean gain; Hake's normalised gain g = (post% − pre%) / (100 − pre%); optional paired t-test in Excel with =T.TEST(pre, post, 2, 1) when the university asks for one.
The file is designed so that every record feeds the next. The flowchart shows the lesson and research design at its centre.
flowchart TD
A["Weeks 1-2: observe Class 7-A, check notebooks"] --> B["Problem: whole-number rules applied to fractions"]
B --> C["Write 20-item diagnostic test, try out, revise"]
C --> D["Pre-test and error coding in Excel"]
D --> E["Group pupils by error type E1 to E5"]
E --> F["Remedial lessons 1-8: concrete, then pictorial, then symbolic"]
F --> G["Observation notes and diary after each lesson"]
G --> H["Parallel post-test"]
H --> I{"Error still common?"}
I -- "Yes" --> J["Second loop: small-group re-teaching"]
J --> H
I -- "No" --> K["Unit achievement test and item analysis"]
K --> L["Action-research report and reflection"]
D --> M["Select one pupil for child case study"]
M --> L| Code | Error | Typical answer |
|---|---|---|
| E1 | Adds numerators and denominators | 2/3 + 1/4 = 3/7 |
| E2 | Bigger denominator means bigger fraction | 1/8 > 1/6 |
| E3 | Wrong conversion of mixed numbers | 2⅓ = 5/3 |
| E4 | Inverts the wrong fraction, or none, in division | 3/4 ÷ 1/2 = 3/8 |
| E5 | "Multiplying always makes bigger" | ½ × 8 estimated above 8 |
The child case study, school case study, achievement test and diary run alongside this cycle rather than after it, so the file reads as one internship rather than seven unrelated chores.
What you actually hand in, in the shape your department marks it.
01 · Lesson plans · 400–700 words per plan; count per university (e.g. 20 or 50 per subject)
Examiners and supervisors want to see that every lesson was planned before it was taught: objectives written as observable pupil behaviour, a sequence of teacher and pupil activity, planned blackboard work and an evaluation that checks the objectives. The lesson-plan file is usually the largest record in the internship and carries the biggest share of the 500 internal marks, though the exact share is set by your university.
| Objectives in behavioural terms, matched to evaluation | 10 |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of mathematical content | 10 |
| Sequence of teacher and pupil activity | 15 |
| Choice and use of TLM | 5 |
| Blackboard plan | 5 |
| Recapitulation, evaluation and homework | 5 |
02 · Action research · 3,000–4,500 words plus appendices
The framework requires at least one action research during internship. Examiners look for a real problem from your class, a clear action hypothesis, an intervention you actually taught, pre/post evidence, and an honest reflection on what did and did not change. It is the record most viva questions come from.
| Problem grounded in own classroom evidence | 10 |
|---|---|
| Tool construction and try-out | 10 |
| Intervention planned and taught | 15 |
| Data presentation and analysis | 10 |
| Reflection and next steps | 5 |
03 · Achievement test with blueprint · Test paper plus 1,200–1,800 words of design and analysis
Shows that you can build a test from a blueprint rather than picking questions at random, and that you can use item analysis to judge your own items. Examiners check that weights across objectives and content add up, that each item matches a blueprint cell, and that you can explain the difficulty and discrimination indices.
| Blueprint with consistent weights | 10 |
|---|---|
| Item quality and match to blueprint | 10 |
| Correct item analysis | 10 |
| Interpretation and decisions | 5 |
04 · Case study of a child · 1,500–2,500 words
Shows that you can look at one learner as a whole person: home, health, school history, feelings about mathematics and strengths, not just a test score. Supervisors check that the study uses several sources, protects the child's identity, and leads to something you actually tried in class.
| Range of sources | 5 |
|---|---|
| Depth of description beyond test scores | 10 |
| Interpretation linked to theory | 10 |
| Steps taken and follow-up | 10 |
| Privacy and consent | 5 |
05 · Case study of the school · 2,000–3,000 words
Shows that you understand the school as an institution, not just a place where you taught: how it is managed, who works there, who attends, what it has and lacks, and how it connects with the community. Supervisors check accuracy against what they see on visits and look for your own analysis, not a list of facts.
| Completeness of profile | 10 |
|---|---|
| Accuracy against observation | 10 |
| Analysis and suggestions | 10 |
06 · Reflective diary guide · 120–250 words per school day
The diary is the evidence that you thought about your teaching every day, not just at the end. Supervisors read it to see whether you notice pupils' thinking, connect events to what you studied, and change your plans in response. It must be written on the day, by you, and is never pre-filled.
| Regular, dated entries throughout internship | 5 |
|---|---|
| Depth of reflection beyond description | 10 |
| Links to theory and changes in practice | 5 |
07 · Teaching aids · 150–250 words per aid
Supervisors look for aids that are cheap, durable, made by you, and actually used to teach a concept rather than displayed. Each aid in the file should show the concept it serves, how it was made, and what happened when pupils used it.
| Relevance to a specific concept or error | 5 |
|---|---|
| Low cost and durability | 5 |
| Evidence of use in class | 5 |
Component 01
Uses the first-year observation weeks and the opening fortnight of the long internship to collect school data on infrastructure, staff, enrolment, the SMC, PM POSHAN and registers, and writes the school case study.
Component 02
Prepares macro lesson plans in the university's format for the mathematics pedagogy subject, gets each one checked before teaching, and records a short self-reflection under every plan taught.
Component 03
Writes and tries out the 20-item diagnostic test, codes errors in Excel, teaches eight remedial lessons in a concrete–pictorial–abstract sequence, gives the parallel post-test and writes the action-research report.
Component 04
Builds a blueprint for a 40-mark unit test on fractions, writes items against it, administers the test after remediation and calculates difficulty and discrimination indices to decide which items to keep.
Component 05
Follows one pupil from the same class whose diagnostic score was very low, using observation, interviews and work samples, and records what changed during remediation with consent and first name only.
Component 06
Keeps a dated reflective diary through the internship, makes five low-cost fraction aids and records their classroom use, and plans a community activity such as a maths fair for parents.
Slide 1
B.Ed Mathematics Internship: Fraction Errors in Class 7
Slide 2
The internship at a glance
Slide 3
The problem I noticed
Slide 4
Objectives and action hypothesis
Slide 5
Diagnostic test
Slide 6
Five error types
Slide 7
Remedial lesson design
Slide 8
Teaching aids
Slide 9
Results (sample format)
Slide 10
Second loop for division
Slide 11
Achievement test and item analysis
Slide 12
Case studies
Slide 13
What I learned
Bullets, speaker notes and the .pptx · ₹999
Read each answer, close it, and say it in your own words. Your viva will ask. Now you'll know.
They apply whole-number addition to the numerator and denominator separately, treating a fraction as two numbers rather than one quantity. The answer 3/7 is even smaller than 2/3, which shows the meaning of the fraction was never connected to the symbol.
Pupils first handle objects such as fraction strips, then draw what they did, and only then work with symbols. It gives the rule a meaning pupils can return to when they forget it, which is exactly what was missing in my class.
I asked measuring questions such as how many half-metre pieces can be cut from three metres of ribbon, and how many halves fit in three-quarters, using paper strips. The 'invert and multiply' rule was introduced only after pupils could see the answer on the strips.
+14 more questions, with answers
Unlocks with the project · ₹999
Unlock for ₹999What to change before it goes anywhere near a submission. Skipping it is how the demo fails live.
Unlocks with the project · ₹999
Unlock for ₹999How to study it, adapt it and walk your examiner through it, step by step.
Unlocks with the project · ₹999
Unlock for ₹999OnlyProjects. (2026). B.Ed Maths Internship File: Diagnostic and Remedial Teaching of Fraction Errors in Class 7: B.Ed Mathematics Education project bundle [Educational resource]. https://onlyprojects.online/projects/bed-maths-ed-class-7-fraction-errors-diagnostic-remedial-internship-file
Keep browsing
Same degree, same syllabus slot, different idea. Pick the one your guide will actually approve.
Educational Technology
ICT-integrated lessons vs textbook-and-wall-map teaching in two sections, with a blueprint-based achievement test
Educational Technology
Two action-research cycles in a government school's smart classroom, measured with a graph-interpretation test and an engagement observation schedule
Science Education
Two action-research cycles with a two-tier diagnostic pre/post test during B.Ed school internship